BANWARI LAL AGRAWAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In his writ application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the seizure of the trade article, as contained ia Annexure-2 to the writ application, as also the order passed by the D Commissioner, Ranchi, in Confiscation case No. 27/R-28 of 987-88. as contained in Aanexure-11, whereby and where- uader, rice, wheat, edible oil and Rahar dal, which were seized by respondent No. 3, have been ordered to be confiscated, under Section c-A of the Essential Commodities Act. 1955.

(2.) It appears that godown-cum-shop of the petitioner was searched on 5-6-1987 at about 11 A. M, and wheat, rice, edible oil and Rahar dal were seized through seizure list, Annexure-1 and thereafter confiscation case under Section 6-A of the E, C. Act was started against the petitioner. Show cause notice was isauetf and tJ-e petitioner bad also filed his show cause and ultimately, the order of the Dy. Commissioner, was passed as contained in Annexure-11, confiscating the trade articles seized from the godown-cum-shop of the petitioner.

(3.) The learned Coansel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that wheat was cot seized from the godown-cum-shop of the petitioner and as such the order suffer J from the judicial application of mind. It was also pointed out that at that time there was no storage limit fixed for rice and as such the Bihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification) Orders, 1954, had no application, so far the rice is concerned. Therefore, it was submitted that the confiscation order passed under section 6-Aof the Act is without jurisdiction.